Argumentative Analysis of Censorship - Research Paper Example

Argumentative Research Paper on Censorship Introduction Censorship exists in many forms and is directed to different people and clusters of people. Censorship is the omission or suppression of material/ information deemed harmful, objectionable and inappropriate from the general public. The restricting party can be a government, a government institution or media outlet (Ringmar, 2007). Censorship is neither wrongful nor righteous in itself. The object or material under censorship determines whether the act is beneficial or detrimental to individuals or a society. In overall, this essay will explore the arguments for and those against censorship citing various examples of countries where censorship has been applied and the resulting consequences of those censures. Censorship will be defined and its various forms identified and defined. Positive attributes will be examined on the backdrop of human welfare and society as well as the negative attributes. Upon evaluation, a conclusion will be reached as to the significance and overall effect of censorship. Discussion Censorship is the omission or suppression of material/ information deemed harmful, objectionable and inappropriate from the general public. The restricting party can be a government, a government institution or media outlet. These organizations judge whether material released or to be released is offensive directly or indirectly to any section of the public such as children, women, a specific ethnic community and workers. However, reasons for censorship can vary dependent on the censoring body and the target population. Censorship can be of several forms. They include moral censorship, military censorship, political censorship and political censorship. OReilly and Parker (2003) note that, “In moral censorship, material of obscene nature and questionable morally is removed, while in military censorship tactical and military intelligence and secrets are kept from the public to prevent the information from being available to the enemy and used against or to the detriment of the nation” (p.2). Political censorship involves the withholding of information by governments and political leaders from their subjects/ citizens as a means primarily of exerting control and dominion over the population. In religious censorship, material deemed objectionable by a sect or its leaders is removed. Information may be from another sect or religion. Corporate censorship conducted and executed mostly by media executives who remove or prevent the publishing/ distribution of information that portrays their businesses or business partners in a negative light or to their detriment. The benefits of censorship to societies and individuals have been debated by social and human welfare experts as well as legislators. The boundaries of censorship and the interests of parties affected by the material are also key areas that are debated and researched over. Undoubtedly, uncontrolled and unregulated censorship can be harmful to societies, lead to ignorance and prove dictatorial. The absence of censorship also can be harmful to the populace and its individuals when exposed to the public. These dangers arise from the dangerous and hazardous nature of the material and information (Ringmar, 2007). Censorship therefore has its advantages and disadvantages. The first and most conspicuous advantage of censorship is its protection of young children especially on the basis of morality and decency (Ringmar, 2007). Children are in their formative years and are not fully mentally and intellectually developed. This fact makes children vulnerable and innocent. Children don’t always comprehend or know what is harmful or good to them and the inability to discern this renders children vulnerable to misleading suggestive information. Media (television, visual advertisements, radio and movies) can and does relay hazardous suggestive behavior and information primarily as violent acts, alcohol and substance use, strong and inappropriate language, immoral sexual behavior and indecent exposure. The continued exposure to this materials and information is familiarization. Children cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality therefore reenacting most of what they see in real life. They are also desensitized to these acts and their possible repercussions. Censorship also has the advantage of ensuring and sustaining harmony in the society. Ringmar (2007) states that, “Societies are often made up of different individuals with different cultural, religious, economic and intellectual backgrounds” (p.9). In addition, people’s characters and personalities vary as there are individuals. Rights and freedoms of individuals require to be protected from the effects of circulation of information that targets any individual or group of individuals based on these differences. For example, threats and information calling for the marginalization, unfair treatment and assaults on peoples of a certain ethnic community has to be censored to protect that community from ethnic based attacks and infringement of their rights. Another instance is the unsupported accusation or defamation of a group of people questioning their actions, religious beliefs or intents. Conflicts of religion are prevented from escalating into violence through censorship. Differing religious communities within the same locality can result in passionate disputes, fights and physical attacks. India for example has two religious groups, immiscible in their beliefs and constantly in tension. Religious groups are very passionate about their religions and beliefs and offensive material published or broadcast against them often result in extremist acts of revenge. The government of India actively censors the materials distributed in the media deemed hurtful or invoking strife. The government prevents the availability of such information and materials to the common people thus averting civil strife (Hoffman, 2001). Another advantage of censorship, as mentioned earlier is the preservation of a nation’s security through the censorship of military intelligence and tactics (Goldberg et al, 2000). War strategies and defense systems comprise of very sensitive information. The possession and awareness of this information on either party at war can determine the outcome of war providing advantages to the bearer of such information and especially an enemy. Explicit censorship aims to prevent the availability of information that can be useful to a nation’s enemies. Military information may include times and dates, locations, and operations and their objectives. The greatest argument for such kind of censorship is that withholding such information reduces the risks military and service men are exposed to during missions and at battle. For example, during the First World War, letters written by British and allied soldiers had to through officers who censored the letters preventing the divulgence of tactical information in their mail that could be useful to their enemies. These special officers marked out or blotted parts of texts that they determined would compromise operations. A surprise ambush on a regiment can be mounted by an enemy from the regiment’s location being availed to the public. The success of covert operations is indeed dependent on the element of surprise and utmost secrecy (Hoffman, 2001). Probably the greatest and most debated negative effect of censorship is the suppression and infringement of freedom of expression and freedom of speech. Many countries around the world have elaborate laws relating to the fundamental rights of individuals known as the bill of rights. One of these rights is that of freedom of expression. Censorship especially that imposed by governments on individuals, institutions and societies greatly restricts the abilities of the people and organizations affected to express themselves, their communication and exchange of information. Governments and officials with excess powers have tendencies to use their powers whether politically, military or through law enforcement to annihilate and root out any perceived opposition to their rule. This is regardless of whether the information under censorship is beneficial or detrimental to the populace. Regimes with little control over the amount or intensity of censorship and such much power vested in their leaders have no self, willful governance, no democracy and people are oppressed. For example, artists and celebrities have been incarcerated and imprisoned without trial for their purported acts of treason for expressing views contradictory to the ruling regimes (Goldberg et al, 2000) Another negative contribution of censorship, under a similar basis, is the removal and restriction of information that would benefit the public. For example, the republic of North Korea has widespread censorship of the internet, television programs and other forms of media (Hoffman, 2001). The nation’s people cannot access vital information crucial for improved economic growth and technological advances. Communication of its citizens to persons of other countries is monitored and rare. This lack of information has led to the dilapidated and antiquated professional practices with the main fields affected being medicine, agriculture and manufacturing. Healthcare thus provided is therefore outdated and therefore inadequate. While censorship may sustain and enhance social harmony, the withholding of all information pertaining individuals or groups of individuals might prove to have negative consequences. Hoffman (2001) states that, “A person should have the privilege of expressing himself or herself on matters that relate to other people” (p.18). That is if he or she so deems the information relevant and useful for continued social harmony whether or not the information is harmful to ones reputation, security, views and freedom. For instance, withholding information of a suspected criminal due to mere suspicion and unfounded facts can protect the criminal from investigation and this in itself is a danger to the society. Censorship may therefore protect crime, acts of terrorism and other unlawful activities which would otherwise have been curbed and prevented. Leaders, organizations and government officials can withhold information from their citizen, stake holders and the public regarding operations and activities under operation or past activities. Reasons for such censorship could vary but in most cases are as a result of sensitive issues. A minister, secretary or public officer may remove or delete information from circulars and press statements that are meant to inform the public the performance of the public office and state of affairs. A sensitive area prone to such censorship is budgetary allocations and the commissioning of expensive projects. Another area susceptible to removal of information is the selection of public officers for service (vetting). Such censorship and rights to withhold information can lead to illegal activities such as embezzlement, canvassing and fraud which are all unsuitable or unfavorable to the public and individuals the offices should serve (Hoffman, 2001). Censorship of media has a negative impact on creativity. According to Goldberg et al. (2000), “…the filtration of materials accessible to the public constrains the producers and creators of those materials” (p.207). Cartoons, comics, music, paintings, audio tapes, books, magazines, television shows and other media are all subject to censorship. The object of any creative thought or process, which some of these works are part of, is the freedom to create without restrictions, constraints and regulations. Creative processes are thus constrained and controlled preventing the artist’s free expression of his or her emotions and self due to hesitation and conformity to the land’s laws or government. Certainly, a considerable amount of this artistic media is objectionable to some factions or obscene to children, questioning various social or political topics such as a political leader or movement. Artists should be free to perform their work, exploring their capabilities. Conclusion Censorship is can serve many purposes and can also result in many consequences and repercussions. The governing bodies in any society or human population are directly responsible for the materials censored in that region or locality. Company executives may censor certain information that should be present in their company reports and financial statements, government officials and public offices representatives may remove or filter specific information on contracts, their true cost and contractor competencies and governments may censor television networks and internet websites accessible or under the influence of opposition leaders. These are the main or most prevalent cases of censorship at present. A social agency may advocate and lodge complaints against the airing of explicit content on the radio waves, television, or internet websites due to the obscenity, immoral suggestiveness, indecency or profanity of the content. Censorship cannot be abolished as it has both its advantages and disadvantages. Categories of censorship can however be defined and parameters established to what types of materials can be censored, the extent to which these materials should be censored and the punitive measures to be undertaken for offenders. A free society is beneficial to all individuals. Freedom does however come with responsibilities and the forfeiture of these responsibilities is the cause of censorship for the protection of the society and common good. References Goldberg, D., Verhulst, S. and Prosser, T. (2000) Regulating the Changing Media: A Comparative Study. London: Oxford University Press. p. 207 Hoffman, F. (2001) Intellectual Freedom and Censorship. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Pres Ringmar, E. (2007) Bloggers Manifesto: Free Speech and Censorship in the Age of the Internet. London: Anthem Press. OReilly, R. and Parker, L. (2003) Censorship or Curriculum Modification? Paper presented at a School Boards Association, p. 14. Read More